Digital Humour Regulation: Supreme Court’s Call on Obscenity
Why in the news
The Supreme Court suggested that the Government bring in regulation to stop vulgar and perverse content being passed off as humour online, without harming free expression.
Key facts
- Any new rules must honour freedom of speech and expression and remain within reasonable restrictions.
- Article 19(1)(a) protects expression through speech, writing, pictures, films and banners, subject to reasonable restrictions.
| Existing law | What it does |
|---|---|
| Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita | Treats lascivious content appealing to prurient interest as a criminal offence |
| IT Act | Has similar penal provisions for obscene online material |
| Cable Television Network Rules | Programme Code bars content offensive to decency |
| IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 | Age-based content classification plus three-level grievance redress: platform, self-regulatory body, inter-departmental committee |
Concerns
- Overreach: frequent FIRs over online content burden the courts, and the borderless internet means one complaint can have wide legal effects.
- Over-regulation: more law could hamper creativity, invite censorship and be misused, since current laws are considered ample.
Way forward
- Offensive content must be tackled, but with a measured response.
- Weigh legal consequences against artistic freedom and public sensibilities.
Exam angle
- Constitutional provision: Article 19(1)(a).
- Rules with a three-tier grievance mechanism: IT Rules, 2021.
- Criminal law on obscenity: BNS.